starwars_exodusfandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:Batman
Wait, what? Are you kidding me? I'' don't have the right to take down the fact that somehow Batman is more intimidating than Wolverine... but you have every right to keep him up there? Much less make that reference that without my permission? That is so freakin' messed up on so many levels.... --Cadden Blackthorne 17:20, April 15, 2010 (UTC) **Okay, so people in the past have used pictures of the characters I've made. They've usually not been exactly the pictures that were used, sometimes they were. Every time, I've gone to that person, either through MSN/AIM/PM or on the talk page of the characters in question and asked them to change it. Sometimes they said yes. Sometimes they said no. It's very similar to this situation. You believe that I've somehow infringed on what defines your character and makes your character him or her. So, you're asking me to change it. This has happened before in the the intimidation area. Cazzik has added some of my characters and some of Adam's characters all the time. I've never bothered to change it, because well, every person is not always scared of the same thing. There was one point in time I believe that Iron Man had Batman listed as someone that people felt was not as scary as Iron Man. I spoke to Cazzik about it, and he agreed with my argument and he changed it. What I didn't do, was change the article for him. No matter how many times picture arguments have happened, no one has gone ahead and taken someone's picture down. There have been requests to find a different picture, but nobody just goes ahead and edits someone else's wiki based off the fact that they think that what the other person did infringed on what makes their character him or her. I can name multiple articles right now that copy or closely mirror images that I've used, and times that I've asked the person to change them and they've said no. I've not gone ahead and just edited their wiki or changed their picture for them. Heck, I'll just go ahead and list them: Castiel = Renato Farani (Oh and look at the awesome discussion on Castiel's talk page!) Katra Kos = Jaina Wyn Ulver Estrel = Early picture of Jerik Blackthorne (I remember talking about it with you and at that point I really stopped complaining about the picture stuff because no one bothered to change them, especially not you.) Pallor Crucio = Future version of Renato Farani (Now, in this case, Arch did say it was okay, and I abide by what he said because it was before I had the character. Does that mean it should have been done? Now, according to your argument it shouldn't have, but back then, you were fine with it.) Radek Vidar = Aeorn Mors I can keep going with others, because I think Jag's done it a couple times. My whole thing is not that Batman is more intimidating than Wolverine. It's that you should ask someone to change it, not take it upon yourself to change their wiki, even if it conflicts with something you believe. I was '''going' to change it actually before you did. But you don't go changing the article based off of what you want to see happen. Had you waited, you would have seen me change it. Or better yet, if it hadn't happened by whatever time you wanted it changed, you could have just asked me to change it, either through the talk page or through a PM or through MSN. As a matter of fact, if you had sent me a PM or an MSN message telling me that you were changing it, and then you changed it, I wouldn't have cared. At the time, when I put that up there, you weren't really active, and Wolverine fell under that interesting category, because you'd kinda given Cazzik permission to use him for the Avengers, but kinda not really. So I felt that it was okay, because if Cazzik had a problem with it, he'd say something. Furthermore, he was using my characters and Adam's characters (mainly just Deadpool), in his intimidation lists, so I thought that it was an understood thing. All that being said, I'll make the change in the wiki now.--Mirrodin ***You are differentiating someone using a visual representation of a character that closely mirrors, or exactly mirrors, one of your own as an argument for referencing a character on the basis of comparison of abilities or traits without permission? Wow, you must really be desperate to win this one. Here's what I've got to say, piece by piece. Take it how you will. 1) No, people are not afraid of the same stuff. But that also goes with the fact that you automatically assume that people are going to be far more afraid of Batman than they are of Wolverine. See my argument on the Moon Knight talk page for the rest of that ditty. As for the pictures part, no, it's not similar. Because, with pictures, you're not referencing anyone but the character that you post the picture for. This is about referencing characters without permission. The farthest I'' personally do it is to show a character's skill (such as Wolverine's reference to Cyclops, which in no way degrades Cyclops as a character, but demonstrates Wolverine's enhanced abilities). 2a) I don't intentionally take other peoples' pictures for my own, and when it does happen, if I feel it is the most appropriate picture to use, I ask if I can keep it anyway, otherwise I usually go fishing for another one. Case in point... Jerik: You never approached me about Jerik's pictures. The only person that did was Cazzik, and that was resolved (and even later defaulted, anyway, when I got his Sadis character)... interestingly enough, I also notice that you didn't bother mentioning him there. Interesting. Pallor: I was unaware of it when I made the character, I presented my case because of who the character is going to be RPed as (once I get the free time... almost there...), and it was agreed without issue. In either case, I actively searched for alternatives in both instances before I asked if I could keep them around. You look at my history, those are actually only two of the three total characters I've actually asked the person who "called it" if I could keep it around. The other was one of my Disciples of the Ancients, which falls under the very pretext of a failure to find a suitable alternative. In all three cases, the person who called "dibs" let me keep it. 2b) Once again, using pictures is '''not' similar to referencing someone else's character on a comparison and competitive basis, without their permission. I doubt I stand alone on that. 3) Your argument does not change the fact that Wolverine should not have been listed without my permission to begin with. To reiterate my previous statement here on this talk page... what gives you the right to add a character in that manner without permission and keep it, and me not the right to get rid of that character under those grounds? My actions are covered by our posting policy, under the pretext of correcting information. It has nothing to do wit pride or ego. The simple fact of the matter is, you didn't ask my permission to put Wolverine on that list, and I moved to take him off because of that fact. Not because I was pissed at you (though I was pissed that you didn't ask my permission before putting him there). Whether you agree with my thought process or not, that's your choice. --Cadden Blackthorne 19:48, April 15, 2010 (UTC) ****With the pictures thing, it's still using a picture that's similar if not the same without asking permission first of the person who already has that picture. You're saying that I can't cite someone's character the way I did without asking permission, but at the same time saying that someone can use someone elses picture without asking permission. I've asked people, not necessarily you in particular, who have used pictures that I've used to please change them. Yet they haven't. But I don't change their wiki's without their permission. I'm agreeing with you that I shouldn't have cited Wolverine without asking you. At the time, I think, you were away, like I said before. So I'll give you that. You're saying that I shouldn't have put it in there without your permission and I'm saying that you shouldn't have taken it out without at least telling me beforehand. I was going to change it and again, had you just told me you were going to do it before you did it, I would have been fine with it. You yourself have Batman cited in the Wolverine article when it comes to martial arts. You didn't ask me before you did that. What if I don't want them to be listed as comparable or equal in skill when it comes to martial arts? Shouldn't you have asked me before you cited Batman?--Mir 21:13, April 15, 2010 (UTC) *****No, you're putting words in my mouth. I never said that someone can use someone else's picture without asking permission. Re-read my argument, you'll see nothing mentioned of the sort. I'm not saying it's okay that people use those pictures without permission... I'm saying that, when I do it, I use a picture that I am unaware is already in use, until someone else points it out. Rarely do I find out before someone else does, but under every circumstance, I either change it within a timely fashion, or I ask if I can keep it as-is, if the aforementioned circumstances apply. Not once did I say it's okay for people to blatantly and deliberately copy someone else's picture for their own character. Cazzik did it very briefly with Iron Man (using Stark, whom I've claimed for Dylan Graham), and had he not changed it promptly I would have asked him to do so. As for me citing Batman without your permission, the fundamental difference is, I'm not saying Wolverine can best Batman in martial arts, I'm saying that, like Batman, Wolverine is considered one of the best martial artists alive. That's not being competitive, or downplaying another character, in any form. It's citing an example to indicate a point. Big difference. In no way have I ever said, "So and so is more intimidating/better of a fighter/smarter/stronger/etc. than this other guy's character." When I cite others, I use them as examples to exemplify my point. Batman's citing indicates nothing as to which one would win in a fist-fight. I take great care in making sure I do not compare my characters to others'. As for asking permission of you to make Wolverine his equal in martial arts... that's bs. Because, to put it blatantly, there are three factors to consider: 1) Wolverine and Batman will never fight, anyway; 2) it's not a comparison statement, because no matter how good they are, who wins depends on the authors involved regardless; and 3) a character's individual skills, without reference to another's, is for that individual to make. Once again, I did not characterize Wolverine against Batman, I characterized him using Batman as an example. Huge difference. You could say "Batman's intimidation factor is compared to that of the likes of..." and there'd be no issues raised (at least from my end). Likewise, I could say, "Wolverine's martial powress is so great that he can beat..." and, despite the fact I don't do that crap (unless it's agianst my own characters, which you'll find often enough), I would completely understand if someone made it an issue. Neither example is under display here. --Cadden Blackthorne 22:02, April 15, 2010 (UTC) *You know what, I'm a pretty laid back guy most of the time. But I am getting really sick and tired of always being used in arguments that I'm not even involved in! Knock it off! You want to argue with each other, fine. I don't care. But start leaving me out of it. Its annoying and it pisses me off. You don't EVER see me listing off the stupid shit other board members have done. And yes, I remember them well. Including both of yours. So I will appreciate not being brought into your arguments anymore. Thank you.--Cazzik 00:43, April 16, 2010 (UTC) **Please, Cazzik, don't get me started on that can of worms. --Cadden Blackthorne 03:10, April 16, 2010 (UTC) ***Get you started on what? I'm asking you two to leave me out of your arguments. There is nothing to be started.--Cazzik 03:11, April 16, 2010 (UTC) ****"You don't EVER see me listing off the stupid shit other board members have done. And yes, I remember them well. Including both of yours." I'm pretty sure you have absolutely no right to bring that kind of comment forward, unless you want to see a pretty long list returned as a response. The "stupid shit" I have done pales in comparison to what can be listed off with what you've done. And this isn't speaking strictly from my viewpoint, but from all the stuff that I've heard other people speak about what you've done in the past. So, therefore, don't get me started on it. That aside, I do apologize for bringing you into the argument, it was not my intent, by a long shot. Had I expected that to have happened, I would not have done that. You should know me better than to make that assumption. --Cadden Blackthorne 03:17, April 16, 2010 (UTC) *****You know what Cadden, we're done. Don't speak to me, role play with me, etc. I'm done with your crap. Every week you find something else to whine about. And you know what, most of the time when you whine to me I just go ahead and fix whatever you have a problem with because it is easier than listening to you. The one time I have an issue with something you are doing you have to argue about it. I didn't make any assumption. I just told you to stop bringing me into your arguments. Seriously, we're done. It's as simple as that.--Cazzik 04:09, April 16, 2010 (UTC) ******Because it must be said... and hear me out on this, please... I do apologize for the retaliation on your comment regarding what stupid stuff is done. I realize it was uncalled for, and no explanation will help the scenario so I will leave it at that. Everyone does stupid stuff, I claim no exception... and that has to be one of the stupidest things I've done/said in a long time. Forgive, or don't... either way, once again, I apologize for that. Take it as you will, use it as you will. --Cadden Blackthorne 04:49, April 16, 2010 (UTC) *Thank you for apologizing. I'm sorry I was a jack ass back to you. I'm good if you're good.--Cazzik 05:15, April 16, 2010 (UTC) **Done, and done. (Okay, that did not look as appropriate as I had envisioned....) Yeah, no worries. Consider us good. If both of you agree, I'd propose that we just clean up (i.e. delete) this whole mess. The only good thing that this will produce is a serious consideration on rehashing any posting policies that are unclear, of which I will see to it that we get it taken care of so that stuff like this doesn't come up again, and it's really not enough to warrant keeping this stuff around. If there is even one disagreement to my proposed action to be taken on this and the Moon Knight talk page (with the exception of its initial creation purpose, as that can be considered separate), then it will not happen. --Cadden Blackthorne 05:23, April 16, 2010 (UTC) ***I'm fine with it.--Cazzik 05:28, April 16, 2010 (UTC)